In response to a statement
of objections (SO) served by the European Commission yesterday regarding
anti-competitive practices, Intel senior vice president and general counsel
Bruce Sewell issued the following statement:
"We are confident that the
microprocessor market segment is functioning normally and that Intel's conduct
has been lawful, pro-competitive, and beneficial to consumers. While we would
certainly have preferred to avoid the cost and inconvenience of establishing
that our competitive conduct in Europe has been lawful, the Commission's
decision to issue a Statement of Objections means that at last Intel will have
the opportunity to hear and respond to the allegations made by our primary
“The case is based on complaints
from a direct competitor rather than customers or consumers. The Commission has
an obligation to investigate those complaints. However, a Statement of
Objections contains only preliminary allegations and does not itself amount to
a finding that there has been a violation of European Union law. Intel will now
be given the chance to respond directly to the Commission's concerns as part of
the administrative process. The evidence that this industry is fiercely
competitive and working is compelling. When competitors perform and execute the
market rewards them. When they falter and under-perform the market responds
According to a 2004 article in BusinessWeek, the European
Commission began investigating Intel as early as 2001, although the initial
probe was dropped.
up again in 2004, which culminated in a raid
of Intel’s European offices in 2005.
AMD hopes the charges filed will benefit consumers. "We
are confident that this statement of objections will be a catalyst in opening
the global microprocessor markets for the benefit of consumers and PC companies
alike,” says AMD EMEA president Giuliano Meroni.
complaints in numerous countries accusing Intel of behavior that has hurt AMD’s
ability to compete on a level playing field. A series of documents
(PDF) filed in US courts detail numerous accusations, including Intel’s supposed attempts to conditionally
offer volume discounts for near-exclusivity, and delaying OEM product launches
that contained competing hardware.
quote: Also, never benefits the customers...how so? Ever since 99, I have had great processors from Intel. Great motherboard chipsets. Nothing AMD has done has changed anything for me. I'm still paying around $300+ dollars for a processor. I'm still paying around $150 - $300 for a motherboard.
quote: AMD has been making superior designs to Intel for a long time. Sure, the Core2 performs better for right now, but it is a half generation ahead. I would be willing to bet Barcelona at 2.3Ghz would match a Conroe at 3Ghz.
quote: Year after year Intel takes AMDs ideas and makes them their own (AMD64/EM64T anyone?). Intel continues to takes ideas from others and use them against the originating company.
quote: Intel continues to takes ideas from others and use them against the originating company.
quote: Competition is multiple companies using different methods to provide similar or the same service to others.
quote: Ever since 3D Now!, Intel has been playing catch up, releasing ideas originally thought of by other players.
quote: They knew Netburst was on its last days...
quote: No they didn't. Read articles on how they expected Netburst to scale to 10ghz at Intel's own Developer Forum.
quote: Not so much an engineering/technical advancement.
quote: If you have an agreement with a company to sell your products, who wouldn't get mad if they wanted to sell someone else's product. If they made an agreement of giving a nice discount on each proc/chipset/etc for not selling a competitor's product and the other side decided to back out, it's simply natural to no longer give a discount. It's called business.
quote: However, lately, AMD has been the innovator, not Intel. Where is Intel's integrated memory controller? Who has the first x86-64 CPU? That isn't to say Intel is doing good things, Core 2 is a very good product.
quote: I think Intel is still trying to destroy the competition instead of learning to live with the competition.
quote: That's what business is about; destroy the competition.
quote: I would say that business is about creating or selling a product which consumers demand, in an ethical and responsible manner.
quote: Intel has clearly employed unethical business practices to stifle competition in an attempt to create a monopoly. Forcing vendors to only sell their products by threatening financial retaliation (via lost discounts and kickbacks), while not necessarily illegal, definitely hurts consumers and should not be tolerated.
quote: The competition aspect of business is indeed about destroying your competitors, and that's what we're dealing with here.
quote: It becomes in Intel's best interest to offer discounts and, in turn, the consumer benefits from the lower price.
quote: The consumer is in no way under any obligation to buy a computer with an Intel chip in it
quote: If the consumer doesn't like that a particular vendor is Intel-only, they're perfectly free to take their business elsewhere.
quote: Ethical companies create good products and services to compete against others, but not to destroy their competition.
quote: Vendors should be allowed to pick and choose which processors to use without the threat of financial retaliation. This is no different than if the government stepped in and said that Intel isn't allowed to provide Dell with 50% of their processors.
quote: This is not beneficial in the long run if AMD exits the CPU business.
quote: it's the requiring exclusivity to get the discounts which is unethical.
quote: When there is no choice, such as there was with Dell for years, then what is to be done? Dell wanted to build AMD based PCs, but could not due to Intel's influence. This is clearly unethical behavior on Intel's part.
quote: Once again, your view is too narrow. What about 10 years from now? If Intel is allowed to continue using underhanded methods of business, forcing AMD out of the CPU market, what do you think will happen to consumer choice and pricing?
quote: By "destroy" I'm not talking about blowing up competitor's buildings, etc.
quote: Your hypothetical scenario with AMD exiting the CPU business is just that.. a hypothetical scenario. The reality, though, is altogether different. AMD isn't going anywhere. The CPU market will not be a one-company deal, not now and not 10 years from now.
quote: Since when is not receiving a discount "financial retaliation"?
quote: Again, a hypothetical scenario that's *not* going to happen.
quote: No, it's not unethical at all. Intel sets the price on their products.. period. If a vendor doesn't want to be Intel-exclusive, they don't have to be.. but Intel doesn't have to supply the vendor with its products, either. Business transactions should be acceptable to the parties involved.
quote: Oh please.. there are plenty of choices. Dell is *far* from the only place Average Joe can go for his/her computer. Dell can want whatever it wants, but what Dell wants isn't necessarily any of Intel's concern.. or responsibility.
quote: Once again, your view is too unrealistic. Ten years from now there will be 2 primary providers in the x86 market. It'll be Intel and either AMD or whatever company purchases it. Consumer choice and pricing will be as competitive as it has ever been.
quote: You do not know the future any better than I. There is no certainty that AMD will still be in the CPU market 10 years from now.
quote: Let's say you're that selling computer parts and that I am your sole supplier, but suddenly a competitor is able to offer better value. You want to sell both products, but I tell you to remain exclusive or else I will take away your kickbacks. That would definitely be financial retaliation, and it is also a rather unpleasant way to do business. If I were to take that approach with everyone, eventually I could force my competitors out of business because I have the volume and spending power to do so.
quote: Vendors should be able to choose a product to sell based on performance and value without remaining exclusive and losing discounts. They could be selling even more Intel processors, but Intel would still demand that AMD chips aren't used. This isn't ethical. Your moral compass is so messed up if you believe otherwise.
quote: You are really quite naive
quote: The idea is that there should be a level-playing field and that all businesses should be allowed to compete without undue influence. Intel violated this notion.
quote: but they should never influence exclusivity with illegal kickbacks. Businesses should be allowed to compete fairly on a level field, pure and simple.
quote: If Intel had not used these underhanded tactics, We'd have had Barcelona last year and we'd be working on the next generation right now. AMD lost out on a lot of money because of Intel's tactics. If AMD gets out of the CPU business, we're all completely screwed. Intel would bring out a clock speed ramp every 5 years or so.AMD has been making superior designs to Intel for a long time. Sure, the Core2 performs better for right now, but it is a half generation ahead. I would be willing to bet Barcelona at 2.3Ghz would match a Conroe at 3Ghz.
quote: AMD has been making superior designs to Intel for a long time.
quote: Sure, the Core2 performs better for right now, but it is a half generation ahead. I would be willing to bet Barcelona at 2.3Ghz would match a Conroe at 3Ghz.
quote: I really hope that the EU now, won’t let this go unpunished, and as I said before, when a company gets as much power as Intel.
quote: Why should ANYONE be a slave at all? Isn't freedom a better alternative?
quote: When you continually rob the hard-working and productive, they lose all interest in continuing their efforts.
quote: The socialists among us would have us believe the latter case is best. Or worse-- they'll try to convince us that its possible to simply "average" incomes without affecting the total wealth of the nation-- to create a case where no one makes $20K and no one makes $100K...but everyone makes $60K.
quote: Contrary to what many of the wealthy say, it is the middle-class which shoulders a disproportionate amount of the tax burden in the U.S.
quote: It's also a fact that the middle-class and the poor are the largest beneficiaries of the spending of "the welfare state".
quote: I really hope that the EU now, won’t let this go unpunished, and as I said before, when a company gets as much power as Intel. They should be stopped, to allow other companies to co-exist.
quote: We are confident that the microprocessor market segment is functioning normally and that Intel's conduct has been lawful, pro-competitive, and beneficial to consumers.
quote: Intel broke the law. They lost the case in Japan, and were found guilty.
quote: There's nothing to know about natural resources, if you have them you produce and sell them, it doesn't get any more complex than that.
quote: How many times must people be knocked in the head with historical facts before they learn from them?
quote: I accidentally down-rated you. I hope a mod will fix it. I meant to give you plus 1.